U.S.F.W. proposes bill to prohibit all members of Python, Boa & Eunectes genera

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, read this:
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=1471997,1471997

Its in an exploratory phase.

Basically like what happened in NY when they proposed a blanket ban - they researched the species, and narrowed the list down to the ones that they considered dangerous. That included a lot of large boids and monitors which, in my humble opinion, probably only belong in Zoos to begin with (though I'm not sure all would agree)...
 
N-E Cichlids;1496944; said:
I think all snakes should be microchiped. I think it should be the responsibility of the seller to register it with the state FWC as to who bought it. If you do not liscense it then you should loose your liscense to sell reptiles. Then when one is released into the wild and caught they can be scanned and know who it belongs to and they should be fined (I'm not talking $50 more like thousands of dollars).

I have to do the same for my restricted species permit on fish. The permit is only good for 6 months. Every June and December I have to submit a report to FWC as to what I brought in, How many and where they went. If I do not submit the report my liscense is not renewed. Same should be done for All dangerous and Harmful animals. There are people out there who can care for these creatures, but we have to stop the Idiots out there who do not care.
Click to expand...


And this is regulation that is important to be done at a local level, but it does not mean that someone who lives in Minnesota should have to worry about their boa establishing an invasive population as much as someone in Florida would.

Its like saying you should regulate whales and dolphins in Kansas....
 
elevatethis;1497082; said:
And this is regulation that is important to be done at a local level, but it does not mean that someone who lives in Minnesota should have to worry about their boa establishing an invasive population as much as someone in Florida would.

Its like saying you should regulate whales and dolphins in Kansas....
Click to expand...

If you apply the rule only to the eco system, then yes I agree with you. Certain Types of animals need to be controled more so than other animals, not just for environmental reasons, but for safety issues. Anacandas are feared throughout the amazon, not because of what they do to the eco system, but for the simple fact that they are extremely dangerous to humans. Tribes along the river use the Amazon as their bathtub. They have to be very cautious everytime they go to the river to bathe or get water.
 
N-E Cichlids;1497133; said:
If you apply the rule only to the eco system, then yes I agree with you. Certain Types of animals need to be controled more so than other animals, not just for environmental reasons, but for safety issues. Anacandas are feared throughout the amazon, not because of what they do to the eco system, but for the simple fact that they are extremely dangerous to humans. Tribes along the river use the Amazon as their bathtub. They have to be very cautious everytime they go to the river to bathe or get water.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand the analogy....how is safety concerning a native animal in its native habitat have anything to do with banning non-native species kept in captivity? I understand that anacondas are dangerous animals...if that's all you were trying to say...

While I understand that condas, burms, and retics could be a danger to the public, it is stupid to ban them because more people are maimed and injured by dogs every year than by snakes in our entire recorded history. The only reason that snakes get that attention is due to the public's irrational fear of them.

I can not think of one case where an escaped python has injured anyone other than its owner, a guest, or resident of the house in which it was kept. Public danger? Not a chance...even in Florida.

I'll share my opinion and be as frank about it as possible:
I do feel that large constrictors (ADULT size 15' and up) should be regulated to an extent. Why? Because putting up a reasonable amount of red tape basically prevents stupid people from obtaining them. If Billy Bob from Louisiana can't even keep his snake locked in its enclosure, chances are he will probably also have trouble obtaining a permit from local government and would probably not end up purchasing the snake to begin with.
 
dirtyblacksocks;1497254; said:
Any non-native animal that has the ability to establish itself in the area it's being kept should be regulated, period.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that...which supports my argument for regulation at the LOCAL level.
 
The big snakes, you can't really argue with, as long as they aren't banning them and just restricting the sale to those with a brain cell. As long as they made it easy for the hobbiest, and impossible to those who struggle to tie their shoe laces.
 
allthough I am against banning per se, I agree that more responsibility should be demanded from keepers ( chips would be a good solution, I think )...
if those big ones have established a viable habitat in Florida ( in Florida everything thrives ) sooner or later the **** is going to hit the fan in relation to people being attacked..

last time i was fishing in the amazon there was another group of guys and one, a dentist ( so not your full blown jerk or retard ) got drunk ( it happens when a bunch of 30/40 year old guys do the "friends of Alex" thing ) and slept on the margin of the river. He was killed by an Anaconda.

Things like that happen in South America and Africa ..they will, regrettably, happen in Florida...

so yes, I thinks large boids should be more "controlled", unfortunately...
 
do it like the aussies atart a\reptile and aviary licenses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom